Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fish on stamps


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was lack of consensus to delete. Ifnord 15:00, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

List of fish on stamps
I found this article with a "db-nonsense" tag. It isn't patent nonsense, but I have moved it on to AfD. From the article's talk page:
 * "Lest anyone think this is frivolous, "fish on stamps" is indeed a standard collecting topic, and there is even a printed book on the subject."

Nominator abstains. —  The KMan  talk  23:18, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * weak delete. Many stamp collectors do collect thematically, and fish is a major theme. But this list would be extremely large and of limited encyclopedia value, as well as being nigh on impossible to keep maintained, given the frequency of new stamp issues worldwide. Grutness...wha?  00:10, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. I don't think this is particularly encyclopedia-worthy, but I'm not so strong in my opinion that I couldn't be swayed. Does Icthyophilately exist?  Does it need to? -Ikkyu2 00:26, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm for keeping it. I don't have strong views but quite a bit of work seems to have gone into the various lists -- you'd actually be deleting many pages. There is a book, although perhaps predictably, it didn't hit the bestseller lists. Given the profusion of articles on Star Wars characters and their doings and other stuff like that, I can't really see that this does any great harm, although a worry would be how likely the different lists are to be updated. It's one of those pages that I wouldn't cry to see it gone but I don't see any great need to get rid of it. James James 00:35, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - I'm not a collector, but it seems to be a valid subject for "topical collecting". Though many stamps are issued each year, there are not necessarily many that are of fish. Agree with James James.  &mdash;ERcheck @ 01:10, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. I imagine a lot of work did go into it, and if it were for a book on stamp collecting that'd be ideal, but it's not encyclopedic. --Brian1979 02:01, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. There are a couple dozen "standard" "X on stamps" topics - people (for which we have an extensive collection of lists), animals of various groups, ships/boats, etc. Fish is certainly one of the common topics. List is stable and low-maintenance when the listing includes a terminating date ("the list is complete through 1986"). I note that FishBase includes stamp data, so at least professional ichthyologists find it useful. "Encyclopedic"? Hard to say, since we don't actually have a non-tautological definition of the word ("it's encyclopedic if it's included in an encyclopedia"). Stan 03:55, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Transwiki????????Youngamerican 04:43, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * '''To where????????"Ikkyu2 04:10, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Thats what I was asking. Wikibooks seems the best bet, but I am leaning towards a keep vote here. Youngamerican 16:19, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete I don't think we're building a guide to stamp collecting but an encyclopedia. --kingboyk 05:38, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Fish are a popular theme in topical stamp collecting, and I see no reason why Wikipedia cannot accommodate a basic list. Walkerma 06:11, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep One of main theme in topical stamp collecting. Plus on fr.wiki, these pages were created by a user specialized in biology and she underscored the errors of naming species on stamps. Sometimes these themes can be linked to some stamp designers like André Buzin with Birds on stamps of Belgium. Sebjarod 12:02, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, seems like a harmless list, would be of great interest to some people. Grandmasterka 22:41, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep and ask nominator to stop and think next time. Wikipedia is not paper, people. Some day we hope all the articles are as thorough as this sort of thing makes stamp collecting.  The editors of this deserve a medal, not a delete nomination.  --James S. 09:16, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, a popular stamp collecting topic. Lerdsuwa 13:31, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong delete as a list that is of interest to very few people, i.e. listcruft. Stifle 17:05, 30 January 2006 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.